The thing is it was not a trial period. There already exists trial periods in Tesla vehicles. They're explicit and give you time remaining. You know exactly wha

The thing is it was not a trial period. There already exists trial periods in Tesla vehicles. They're explicit and give you time remaining. You know exactly what is happening. Instead, what happened is Tesla couldn't provide the configuration of cars that people wanted because it wasn't economical for them to do so. So instead they sent them another model of the vehicle with different hardware. It was a stop gap solution. It appears that many people were unaware either by their own lack of attention, or because they were mislead, or because Tesla didn't make it clear enough what was happening. So: 1. Tesla offered to sell a product. 2. People bought the product. 3. Tesla realized it was not economical to sell the product. 4. Tesla decided not to manufacture the product that they offered. 5. Tesla gave the customers a different product in order to retain the sale rather than cancel the orders. (Even to the degree that the sales documentation refers to the product as SR+ and not SR.) 6. Months pass. 7. Tesla develops software that will after-the-fact modify the product that customers were provided. Tesla is part and parcel of the problem here. This "it's not fair" rings hollow to me.